THIS MAN HAS PROOF THAT OBAMA IS GAY

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.vice.com

Posted by Aleks Eror

This American Presidential election race hasn’t been a pleasant thing to watch. In fact, it’s been a well-manicured, expensively-buffed torrent of slander, seeking to debase candidates on both sides. All the usual smear campaign tactics have been employed, as you’d expect, but a man named Jerome R. Corsi (above) has a new one to unleash: that Obama is a closeted homosexual.

Yep, I know, big news right? Big, crazy, made-up news that somehow typifies American political discourse. Anyway, the weird thing is that Jerome isn’t just some hillbilly crackpot making outrageous, homophobic claims at an NRA barbecue, but a Harvard-educated journalist who writes for World Net Daily, an ultra-conservative news organization that boasts headlines like “Kids Drink ‘Gay’ Kool-Aid“. He also likes to appear on white supremacist radio shows, like The Political Cesspool, which might give you an idea of the kind of guy he is.

Between being a right wing media sensation, he’s found the time to write a couple of books on Obama – books that allege he was molested as a child, is a Communist and, of course, that he’s gay. I called him up to find out where these accusations came from.

Is this real life?

VICE: So how did you stumble across these allegations that Obama is gay?
Jerome R. Corsi: I started researching Obama in 2006 and wrote two books on him. In 2008, I wrote The Obama Nation, then, in 2011, I wrote a book about the birth certificate debate. The issue of Obama’s sexuality has had rumours surrounding it since I first started studying him. There were rumours even when he was the US senate, in fact. I just needed some sources to validate it.

Why are those rumours only coming out around election time?
Well, Obama has been weakened significantly since he was first elected, when it was difficult to criticise him at all. More and more people are starting to resent or oppose Obama, so, as this happens, more people are ready to talk about these issues.

And one of the first people to talk was Larry Sinclair, right? Could you tell me more about him?
Larry wrote a book about having two homosexual encounters with Obama in 1999, when Obama was state senator. 

Larry’s not the most reliable of sources, though. He’s a self-confessed fraudster, wanted in Arizona.
Yeah, I didn’t believe everything he said, but his story was always consistent. Also, a guy called Daniel Parisi brought a defamation case against Larry for writing the book, but a federal district judge threw it out of court, which isn’t to say Larry was telling the truth, but this judge clearly didn’t think he was lying either. That was the turning point for me. Also, the fact that in his story he was the initiator, always made me think there must be something to it, because he didn’t try to make himself look like the good guy. He said he got in a limousine and told the driver to drive around, cruising for guys.

Who was the driver?
I don’t know. That’s always been one of the problems with Larry’s story. He supposedly said to the driver, “I want a guy” and the driver said, “I got the exact guy for ya,” then took him to meet Obama.  

Right. And what about Donald Young? How does he fit into the story?
Donald Young was a black choirmaster who was killed execution-style in Chicago in 2007. Rumours were that Young had been having a homosexual relationship with Obama and was murdered so the story couldn’t get out.

You’ve also talked a lot about the mysterious wedding ring Obama wore in his youth.
Ah, yes. Obama had been wearing this ring on his wedding finger since he was at Occidental College. When he was president of the law review magazine at Harvard, they did a mock issue and mentioned how he would always deflect questions about the ring. There are also photos of him in Africa in ’85 or ’86 wearing the ring, so he had it on for at least a decade before he got married. A lot of people suggest it was either to keep women away, or to act as some kind of wink-wink gay sign.

Yeah, that, or just a fashion accessory, I suppose. There are suggestions something happened with his roommate too, right?
Yes. A guy called John Drew said he and Obama had lunch together one day, and saw Obama come in with his Pakistani roommate, Mohammed Hasan Chandoo. Drew told me in an interview that he was convinced that they were lovers at the time. Candoo has been married and has children, but he wouldn’t be the first guy in history to have a family and be gay or bisexual.

I guess we’ll have to take his word as gospel then. I thought Obama was supposed to be attracted to older white men, though?
Yep, that’s been the story all along; older white men. I’ve found two or three who claimed to have had relationships with Obama, but they won’t go on the record.

I can imagine. They probably don’t want to be executed, right? What first made you think that Obama is gay?
From the very first time I watched him from the senate gallery, I suspected that he might be. The way he talked to other men was very intimate and over-comfortable, y’know? Then, when I started preparing interviews for The Obama Nation, I was told stories about Obama being gay almost from the first confidential interview I had. There’s a big culture of homosexuality in politics in Chicago. There’s a place called the Purple Hotel, where male politicians would allegedly rent a room, take crystal meth and special K and invite male and female prostitutes for a sex party.

Do you think that Obama’s kids are his?
I’m not going to answer that. I’ve got some information on it, but I don’t have enough to be really confident. It’s certainly a question that I’ve been thinking about, too.

You’ve also said that Obama is a Communist. Where did you get that from?
In his autobiography, Obama talks about this guy Frank who he spent a lot of time with as a kid. Frank turned out to be Frank Marshall Davis, who was a member of the Communist party in the 1930s. There’s a suggestion that Davis is Obama’s real biological father, but regardless of that, he’s definitely his intellectual father. A lot of themes Obama adopts were first expressed by Davis and Davis was definitely a commie. Obama took out all the references to Davis in the audio version of his book, so he was clearly trying to hide it.

Nowadays, Obama is continuing with themes of redistributing income and has made it abundantly clear to people that he really does follow this socialist model. It has been well established in American politics that Obama is a leftist, a socialist and virtually a Communist.

Do you think he’ll turn America into a Communist society if he’s re-elected?
I believe he will do everything he can to try and achieve that goal, yes.

And you’ve mentioned this guy Jeremiah Wright before, who arranges “down-low” marriages of gay men to women who can’t find a husband. The thing is, Michelle Obama is quite an attractive, outgoing woman – why would she agree to an arrangement like that?
I’ll be happy to give her to you! [Laughs] I think the general perception of Michelle in the United States is that she’s quite difficult, quite bitter and quite angry. She gives off that persona at conventions and appearances where she’s the loving mother and all the rest of it, but I think there’s another side to her.

I also read your article that suggested Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in Benghazi, was also gay.
I didn’t say he was gay outright, I just said there was a lot of evidence that suggested he was gay. Also, Obama’s state department is very heavily recruiting LGBT for foreign service. I may have mentioned in the article that there was at least one incident where, in Pakistan, our embassy held a gay pride day and it caused a riot in Pakistan.

Do you think the riots in Benghazi were caused by people finding out about ambassador Stevens’ sexuality?
I don’t have any proof of it, but it’s certainly occurred to me, because it looks like he was targeted. It’s odd, because Stevens helped the rebels, so he should have been a friend, but then they ended up targeting him. There has to be some explanation why Stevens was targeted and why Hillary Clinton is doing everything she can to shut down an inquiry, rather than answering questions.

Some people would say that this is all just political slander, in light of the fact that it’s election year and these allegations just happen to be coming out now.
I think the reason people are coming out with this stuff now is because there’s an increasing sense that Obama’s going to lose, so sources are freer to release information than they were six months ago. I think, if he loses, you’re going to see a huge increase in Obama’s male ex-lovers telling their stories.

Why exactly is this of so much interest to you? I’ve read articles where people suggest your obsession with Obama reflects your latent homosexuality.
Yeah, some media has devoted more time to investigating me than it has Obama, but my sexuality is pretty simple; I’ve been married a long time and have always been heterosexual. I’m not antagonistic towards gays – I’ve had many gay friends – but I’m not gay myself.

Oh. So what’s the big deal if Obama’s gay or not? I had you down as some homophobic whackjob who wanted to prove Obama was gay out of hatred for homosexuals.
No, the issue for me is hypocrisy. I might have some attitudes towards sexuality, but God says to not make judgements about other people, so I refuse to get into it; it’s not an issue. But hypocrisy is an issue, especially in politics. The majority of people aren’t going to care if he is gay, but he has to be forthright about it. If he lies about it, it becomes a totally different issue. It’s the same as his birth certificate. He was happy to be “born in Kenya” while he was trying to sell books, but as soon as he started running for President, he completely changed his story.

He was forthright about his drug use, though. Why wouldn’t he be forthright about this?
They knew they had to be open about that issue, so they tried to turn it into an aspect of his cool, youthful persona, but I think they viewed his homosexuality as a liability, so they lied about it. Politicians who think they have to lie to create this mythical persona are living in a past era, and if they lie about their persona, they also tend to lie about their politics.

Until people like you uncover the truth?
I don’t take any great joy in doing it, it’s just what I do. The people are intelligent; you can’t lie to them forever.

 

Alleged Fort Hood Shooter Nidal Hasan Receives Promotion, Legion Of Merit

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.duffelblog.com

Posted by DICK SCUTTLEBUTT

FORT LEAVENWORTH, KS — Army officials have confirmed that Nidal Hasan was promoted to Lieutenant Colonel yesterday in a small and solemn ceremony in the gathering room of Fort Leavenworth’s maximum security prison.

The alleged mastermind behind the Fort Hood Shootings was ecstatic about the crossing of a major milestone in his military career and thanked all those in attendance. Meanwhile, protests were held outside the base, with people chanting “justice for the victims” and “don’t promote.” One participant stated that this ceremony was a “slap in the face of all the victims” from the massacre. Base officials refused to comment, declaring that Hassan’s promotion was decided months ago by personnel management officials.

When asked about the promotion, Major General William Hewitt, Commanding General of Human Resources Command (HRC), stated that Hasan’s personnel record was not negatively flagged by the chain of command and that by regulation the “Army had no choice but to award promotion to the service member.” When asked to elaborate about how such an oversight could occur, the general stated that the Army’s electronic human resources systems were undergoing upgrades that may have affected Hasan’s status.

“HRC has been physically migrating its systems to a new building at Fort Knox [Human Resources Command Headquarters] after the discovery of asbestos and mold in the current data storage warehouse. Unfortunately the files have been moved to a computer system that is not yet Y2K compliant. This might have affected the records of hundreds of personnel, including Hasan.”

During an investigation of Hasan’s service record, The Duffel Blog obtained several evaluation reports detailing the officer’s performance history. Of note is one report covering the period during Hasan’s alleged shooting spree. His superior officer, Colonel Nathan Butterworth, stated that Hasan has an excellent record stained with the occasional blemish.

“While not the best team player, Major Hasan has a peerless tactical mind with a demonstrated record of close quarters combat marksmanship.” Butterworth goes on to state “Major Hasan is an unparalleled asset to the Army. His capability to think like the enemy, allows him the ability to provide the military with a perspective not seen by the rest of the organization.”

Hasan also received a Legion of Merit from his superiors at Darnell Army Medical Center at Fort Hood upon Hasan’s transfer to Fort Leavenworth. Standard practice in the Army is to award soldiers a “Permanent Change of Station” award reflecting the sum total of their contributions while at their installation. Since Hasan’s movement to Leavenworth’s maximum security facility was technically a Permanent Change of Station, he was submitted for the award as a formality. The Legion of Merit was awarded during the same ceremony as Hasan’s promotion, although the officer presenting the award was forced to move Hasan’s beard to one side to affix it to his uniform.

The award now hangs inside Hasan’s cell, below a framed letter from Osama Bin Laden, congratulating Hasan on the “successful slaughter of dozens of infidels.”

Luckily, said Hewitt, the error was caught in time to prevent the promotion of SPC Bradley Manning, who allegedly leaked over 40,000 top-secret military and diplomatic documents to the WikiLeaks website in the largest confidential document dump in American history. His adverse action flag was restored before he could attain the rank of Sergeant.

Manning was reportedly disappointed in being removed from consideration, as he had already begun studying for the Sergeant Promotion Board, but at least has the consolation of having received a Good Conduct Medal during the interim. It is unknown at this time how many personnel received promotions and awards in error, and the Army Inspector General’s office is continuing to investigate.

Read more: http://www.duffelblog.com/2013/03/alleged-fort-hood-shooter-nidal-hasan-receives-promotion-legion-of-merit/#ixzz2TzyvZiU0

 

More Obama aides knew of IRS audit; Obama not told

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from AP

Posted by CHARLES BABINGTON, AP

Associated Press writers Stephen Ohlemacher, Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Jim Kuhnhenn and researcher Monika Mathur contributed to this report.

FILE – In this May 15, 2013 file photo, President Barack Obama speaks in th…

WASHINGTON (AP) — White House chief of staff Denis McDonough and other senior advisers knew in late April that an impending report was likely to say the IRS had inappropriately targeted conservative groups, President Barack Obama’s spokesman disclosed Monday, expanding the circle of top officials who knew of the audit beyond those named earlier.

But McDonough and the other advisers did not tell Obama, leaving him to learn about the politically perilous results of the internal investigation from news reports more than two weeks later, officials said.

The Treasury Department also told the White House twice in the weeks leading up to the IRS disclosure that the tax agency planned to make the targeting public, a Treasury official said.

The apparent decision to keep the president in the dark about the matter underscores the White House’s cautious legal approach to controversies and reflects a desire by top advisers to distance Obama from troubles threatening his administration.

Obama spokesman Jay Carney defended keeping the president out of the loop on the Internal Revenue Service audit, saying Obama was comfortable with the fact that “some matters are not appropriate to convey to him, and this is one of them.”

“It is absolutely a cardinal rule as we see it that we do not intervene in ongoing investigations,” Carney said.

Republicans, however, are accusing the president of being unaware of important happenings in the government he oversees.

“It seems to be the answer of the administration whenever they’re caught doing something they shouldn’t be doing is, ‘I didn’t know about it’,” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told CBS News. “And it causes me to wonder whether they believe willful ignorance is a defense when it’s your job to know.”

Obama advisers argue that the outcry from Republicans would be far worse had McDonough or White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler told the president about the IRS audit before it became public, thereby raising questions about White House interference.

Still, the White House’s own shifting information about who knew what and when is keeping the focus of the IRS controversy on the West Wing.

When Carney first addressed the matter last week, he said only that Ruemmler had been told around April 22 that an inspector general audit was being concluded at a Cincinnati IRS office that screens applications for organizations’ tax-exempt status. He said the audit was described to the counsel’s office “very broadly.”

But on Monday, Carney said lower-ranking staffers in the White House counsel’s office first learned of the report one week earlier, on April 16. When Ruemmler was later alerted, she was told specifically that the audit was likely to conclude that IRS employees improperly scrutinized organizations by looking for words like “tea party” and “patriot.” Ruemmler then told McDonough, deputy chief of staff Mark Childress, and other senior advisers, but not Obama.

The Treasury official said Monday that the department twice passed on information to the White House about the IRS’ plans to disclose the political targeting. Childress and Treasury chief of staff Mark Patterson were in communication on the matter, as were lawyers at both the White House and Treasury.

In the first instance, Treasury officials told the White House that Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups, was considering making a public apology in a speech.

Around the same time, Treasury relayed to the White House that Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller expected to be asked about the matter in congressional testimony on April 25, but the issue was not raised.

However, the Treasury official said the department did not tell the White House about the IRS’ final decision for Lerner to apologize for the targeting during a conference on May 10. The official was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and insisted on anonymity.

The IRS is an independent agency within the Treasury Department. Because of that independent status, the official said Treasury deferred to the IRS in its decision about how to make the targeting public.

Despite the notifications from the Treasury Department, which oversees the IRS, the White House insists it did not know the conclusions of the inspector general report until it was made public.

Members of Congress sent the IRS at least eight letters since 2011 asking about complaints from tea party groups that they were being harassed by the IRS. Many of those lawmakers are livid that the IRS chose to reveal that conservative groups were being targeted at a legal conference instead of telling Congress.

A new Pew Research Center poll shows 42 percent of Americans think the Obama administration was “involved” in the IRS targeting of conservative groups, while 31 percent say it was a decision made solely by employees at the IRS.

The IRS matter is one of three controversies that have consumed the White House over the past week. In each instance, officials have tried to put distance between the president and questionable actions by people within his administration.

As with the IRS investigation, the White House says Obama learned only from news reporters that the Justice Department had subpoenaed phone records from journalists at The Associated Press as part of a leaks investigation. And faced with new questions about the deadly attacks in Benghazi, Libya, Obama’s advisers have pinned responsibility on the CIA for crafting talking points that downplayed the potential of terrorism, despite the fact that the White House was a part of the process.

Former White House officials say a president has little choice but to distance himself from investigations and then endure accusations of being out of touch, or worse.

“It’s a tough balance,” said Sara Taylor Fagen, who was White House political director for President George W. Bush from 2005 to 2007.

“With a scandal, there’s no way to win,” said Fagen, whom the Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed and sharply questioned in a probe of dismissed U.S. attorneys. “There may never have been any wrongdoing by anyone in the White House, on any of these issues,” she said, “but once the allegations are made, you can’t win.”

A White House peeking into an ongoing investigations can trigger a political uproar. A well-known case involved President Richard Nixon trying to hinder the FBI’s probe of the Watergate break-in.

In a less far-reaching case in 2004, the Bush White House acknowledged that its counsel’s office learned of a Justice Department investigation into whether Sandy Berger – the national security adviser under President Bill Clinton – had removed classified documents from the National Archives. Democrats said the White House hoped to use the information to help Bush’s re-election campaign.

In the current IRS matter, two congressional committees are stepping up their investigations this week with hearings during which IRS and Treasury officials will be questioned closely about what they knew and when.

Former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman heads to Capitol Hill on Tuesday, giving lawmakers their first opportunity to question the man who ran the agency when agents were improperly targeting tea party groups. The Senate Finance Committee wants to know why Shulman didn’t tell Congress – even after he was briefed in 2012 – that agents had been singling out conservative political groups for additional scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status.

Also testifying will be Miller, who took over as acting commissioner in November, when Shulman’s five-year term expired. Last week, Obama forced Miller to resign.

On Wednesday, Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin will testify before the House oversight committee.

Treasury inspector general J. Russell George says he told Wolin about the subject of the IRS inquiry last summer.

In a related matter, the IRS acknowledged Monday that an official testified to Congress about tax-exempt matters long after her duties supposedly had shifted to the rollout of Obama’s health care law.

Republicans point to Sarah Hall Ingram’s history at IRS as they question the agency’s ability to properly oversee aspects of Obama’s health care overhaul. The IRS will play a major role in determining benefits and penalties under the new law.

The IRS had said last week that Ingram shifted to overseeing the health care law rollout in December 2010, well before alarm bells went off at headquarters that a unit of the tax exempt division was targeting tea party groups for extra scrutiny.

But records show she testified to Congress in her capacity as head of the tax-exempt office as recently as last year.

Monday the IRS said in a statement that Ingram “was in a unique position to testify” about tax-exempt policies in May 2012. It said Ingram “still formally held” the title of IRS commissioner of tax exempt and government entities, even though “she was assigned full-time to (health care law) activities since December 2010.”

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, says Congress needs to find out what Ingram and other officials knew, and when they knew it.

———

 

‘It made him look like a butler’: Retired general blasts President Obama for ordering U.S. Marine to break military rules by holding an umbrella

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from www.dailymail.co.uk

Posted by DAVID MARTOSKO IN WASHINGTON, JAMES NYE and DANIEL BATES

• The President unwittingly forced two U.S Marines to break protocol and regulations as he ordered them to use umbrellas
• Former United States Air Force Lieutenant Thomas McInerney criticized the President for making the officers look like butlers
• Came as he was assailed by questions over three scandals engulfing White House during Rose Garden press conference with Turkish Prime Minister
• Answered questions on Benghazi where no marines guarded ambassador Chris Stevens despite his repeated requests for better protection
  

President Obama humiliated the marine who he asked to hold his umbrella by making him ‘look like a butler’, a respected military general claimed today.

Thomas McInerney, a former United States Air Force Lieutenant General, said that the President showed a ‘lack of respect’ by making the soldier shelter him from a shower.

He also said that the President has plenty of aides so did not understand why one of them could not have held the umbrella.

Scroll Down for Video

Hoping for a break in the storm: Obama faced a barrage of questions over three simultaneous scandals engulfing his administration

Broken Regulations: US Marines hold umbrellas during light rain for US President Barack Obama and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan

The President caused a stir when he summoned over two marines to keep him dry at a press conference in the Rose Garden.

The marines held an umbrella over the President and the Turkish Prime Minister individually as Obama made jokes about the weather.

However, for some the move was not a laughing matter particularly as it is a breach of protocol for marines to hold umbrellas while in uniform.

Lt Gen McInerney told MailOnline that he found it particularly insulting how the President at one point his his hand under the marine’s arm ‘like he wasn’t doing a good job or something’.

He said: ‘The President has stood in the rain before without an umbrella and a marine would generally stand there without holding an umbrella.’

‘He isn’t some kind of butler or something.

‘It makes the other guy (the other marine) look like a butler too.’

‘I think it’s a lack of respect for the marine, that’s what I think.’

‘I don’t understand why one of his aides could not have held the umbrella. The marine is a warrior but the aides are not.’

Lt Gen McInerney, 76, served in Vietnam and fought with NATO and was commander of the 11th Air Force in Alaska before retiring.

He said: ‘If I was his (the marine’s) commander…I’d say good job, you did what he wanted you to do but you can’t, really he has to keep his comments to himself because if you say anything you’re going to get in trouble.’

‘Any time a marine has said something…one general who spoke out, he got fired, he got canned from his job.’

Lt Gen McInerney also lashed out at the President for not doing enough to support soldiers when they return home from combat.’

He said: ‘The President talks a good line but he doesn’t follow a good line. These guys are coming home and they’re not getting what they are supposed to get.’

‘The guy’s (Obama) got to get real and he’s got to start doing stuff the right way and answering questions in the right manner, not changing subject in the middle of the interview.’

According to Marine Corps regulations, not even the President of the United States can request a Marine to carry an umbrella without the express permission of the Commandant of the Marine Corps.

The Marine Corp Manual, which is the bible for all soldiers serving, specifically states that a soldier’s uniform dress code does not allow the carrying of an umbrella and ‘no officer or official shall issue instructions which conflict with, alter, or amend any provision without the approval of the Commandant of the Marine Corps.’

Indeed, male Marines are informed never to carry an umbrella from the earliest phases of training.

Regulation MCO P1020.34F of the Marine Corps Uniform Regulations chapter 3, rules out any use or carrying of an umbrella while a Marine is in uniform.

However, female Marines ‘may carry an all-black, plain standard or collapsible umbrella at their option during inclement weather with the service and dress uniforms. It will be carried in the left hand so that the hand salute can be properly rendered.’

Insensitive? Many have questioned the President’s actions

Rule Breaker: President Barack Obama, center, watches a Marine remove the umbrella after it stopped raining during his joint news conference with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan

Many commentators found the use of the marines to be particularly insensitive, given the President was answering questions on Benghazi.

The lack of marines protecting Ambassador Chris Stevens at the Libyan consulate and the failure to deploy marines to protect him amid the outbreak of violence has come under fire ever since last year’s attack on September 11.

Usually a marine guard would be in force at an overseas diplomatic compound but in Benghazi the government opted to use a private Libyan security team.

Stevens had made repeated appeals for improved security at the Libyan base but to no avail.

Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty were part of a CIA security team stationed a mile away who heard gunshots and intervened to try and help Stevens. They were also killed in an attack on their compound.

When violence broke out there were also delays sending in marines to assist.

A rapid response team were twice told to stand down amid the chaos while reports at the time said the Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team was delayed because the state department ordered them to deplane and change into civilian clothing.

Answering questions on Benghazi, President Obama said the government was ‘ continuing to review our security at high-threat diplomatic posts’ in light of the attack.

At the press conference originally intended to be a victory lap for the United States’ relationship with Turkey, Obama stood alongside Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan and fielded questions which quickly shifted to the trio of scandals that are engulfing his administration.

Critical: Thomas McInerney, a former United States Air Force Lieutenant General, said that the President showed a ‘lack of respect’

Admission: Obama admitted that the U.S. needs to ‘learn the lessons of Benghazi’ but he called it an ‘incident’ rather than a terror attack

He also dodged questions about the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, and said ‘I offer no apologies’ for the Department of Justice’s secret seizure of reporter’s phone records in search of a classified intelligence leak.

He has been under growing pressure over these issues and Benghazi in recent weeks.

It has emerged that his State Department political appointees intervened in the aftermath of the 2012 terror attack, in a process that resulted in a misleading set of talking points which ignored terrorism in favor of a more muted explanation, in the midst of a re-election campaign.

Addressing the Benghazi fallout pre-emptively before Erdogan spoke, Obama said that ‘at my direction, we’ve been taking a series of steps that were recommended by the review board.’

He spoke of various measures he was recommending, to ‘learn the lessons of Benghazi.’ But he referred to the murders of four Americans there as an ‘incident,’ not a terror attack.

He said: ‘That’s why, at my direction, we’ve been taking a series of steps that were recommended by the review board after the incident.  We’re continuing to review our security at high-threat diplomatic posts, including the size and nature of our presence; improving training for those headed to dangerous posts; increasing intelligence and warning capabilities.’

‘And I’ve directed the Defense Department to ensure that our military can respond lightning quick in times of crisis.’

And his remarks focused on ‘properly funding’ the State Department and Pentagon-run security at diplomatic posts, shifting the burden to Congress to ‘provide resources and new authorities so that we can implement all the recommendations of the Accountability Review Board which issued a report last month’.

He said: ‘We’re going to need Congress’s help in terms of increasing the number of our Marine Corps Guard who protect our embassies.

‘We’re not going to be able to do this alone,’ Obama said. ‘We need Congress.’

The review board is under fire for failing to interview high-level Obama administration figures, including then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Interviewing Clinton, Republicans on Capitol Hill have said, would have provided insights into who was accountable for lapses in security that left the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya vulnerable to attack.

The Tea Party Patriots and other conservative groups provided a powerful rallying force during the 2010 midterm elections. It was around the same time that the Obama administration’s IRS began targeting such groups that applied for tax-exempt nonprofit status

But despite Obama’s plea for more funding, money was not an issue in the months before the Benghazi attack when consular officials in Libya asked the State Department for more security forces.

Those requests were repeatedly denied, and neither Hillary Clinton nor other State Department officials have raised a lack of funding as the reason more special forces were not on the scene.

On the night of the Benghazi attack, the State Department refused to authorize an existing special forces team in the Libyan capital city of Tripoli to board a military C-130 plane headed to Benghazi, despite their readiness to intervene.

The Obama administration said later that the decision was made because the forces would not have arrived at the consulate, which was under attack, in time to make a difference.

The State Department has been silent on the question of how it knew how long the armed, military-style assault from Islamist terror groups would last.

Obama addressed the need to for ”increasing intelligence and warning capabilities’ at ‘diplomatic posts around the world,’ and asked Congress for money to ‘increase the Marine Corps contingents’ at State Department facilities.

On the IRS scandal, Obama said he knew nothing of what was going on.

‘My main concern is fixing a problem,’ Obama said.

‘It is just simply unacceptable for there to be even a hint of partisanship’ in the IRS.

Obama calls in marines to hold umbrellas

Barack Obama (R) and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan hold a joint news conference in the White House Rose Garden, but most of the focus was on three unfolding White House scandals

He also  expressed ‘complete confidence’ in Attorney General Eric Holder, whose Justice Department deputies saw two months of phone records from Associated Press reporters and editors.

Holder has told Congress he recused himself from the investigation, but admitted Wednesday during a Capitol Hill hearing that he failed to put that recusal in writing.

The investigation centered on a secret CIA operation in Yemen that foiled a terror plot to blow up a U.S.-bound airliner.

AP were believed to have received a leak of information from a government source.

‘Leaks related to national security can put people at risk,’ Obama said.

‘I offer no apologies’ for putting a high premium on national security, he said, while also allowing that the First Amendment’s press freedoms are important to him philosophically.

Despite the wide range of topics up for discussion it is the umbrella incident which certainly captured chatter online.

A mock Twitter account was set up for the marine involved while numerous videos appeared online poking fun at the issue.

It doesn’t rain it…Air Force One Staff Sergeant Brian Barnett is pictured following behind the President with an umbrella as he boards Air Force One in 2011

Keeping dry: Many different individuals have held umbrellas for the commander in chief

Not singing in the rain: President Obama was pictured struggling with an umbrella himself in New Orleans in 2010 but he managed to laugh at himself moments later

It is not the first time Obama has struggled when it comes to keeping dry.

Often assistants are on hand to offer the President cover – be it leaving a car or embarking Air Force One.

On one occasion the President’s own struggles navigating an umbrella showed why.

He managed to smile for cameras in 2010 when he got in a muddle trying to get an umbrella over a fence.

He was trying to do the gentlemanly thing and protect wife, Michelle, from the rain.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325893/President-Obama-makes-U-S-Marine-break-rules-does-look-happy-it.html#ixzz2TbYxIPFB
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

Retired 4 star Admiral Blows Whistle on Benghazi new Evidence

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.politisite.com

Posted by Doc Vega

A lot has been said and written, but this promises to break the case wide open!

Ambassador Stevens carried through the streets of Benghazi for 5 hours while US media alleged he was being helped to the hospital? More Obama White House lies!

There have been many theories and accusations about the Benghazi fiasco that not only cost Ambassador J. Christian Stevens his life, but the lives of his staff and one Navy Seal body-guard as well. This action which led to a complete conflagration of terrorist attacks against US diplomatic buildings throughout the Middle East and North Africa still remains largely uninvestigated by the government, unprosecuted by AG Eric Holder’s Depart of Justice, and refuses to bring the guilty parties to justice while many know the truth and are not coming forward. Even though President Obama is implicated in this oversees tragedy still the truth has not emerged.

That has all changed. Finally, an authoritative figure with the proper credentials has stepped up to the plate to tell the true story of what did happen without the lies and cover-ups that have so far kept those guilty of murder from standing trial. The admission on the part of this man will likely blow the Benghazi scandal wide open and lead to arrests if we can get our legal system to act as it should. That, however, is a big if.

Related: Read Letter: Special Ops Vets Demand Benghazi Congressional Investigation

The story as it truly unfolded

According to a report from the Washington Times, retired 4 Star Admiral James Lyons reveals the entire plot that led to the deaths of Americans in Libya that could have been prevented, who gave the orders, and why events took place as they tragically did. Admiral James Lyons is probably the highest ranking figure ever to intervene in a federal government criminal case, and testify. Thanks to this man’s dedication to his country and the truth, we will finally know the truth and who was responsible.

In his words Lyons says that the attack on Benghazi was a bungled kidnapping attempt to be perpetrated upon Ambassador Stevens. This was to appear to be a hostage exchange for a terrorist prisoner who was to be released in trade for a supposedly captured US ambassador. The trade would have been for Omar Abdel Rahman an international prisoner, known as the Blind Sheikh.

This apparent abduction by terrorists of our ambassador and then negotiated trade for the Blind Sheikh would have been the “October Surprise” that would have elevated President Obama’s flagging popularity and boosted his approval ratings for a re-election. A dramatic prisoner exchange that saved our ambassador’s life However, something went horribly wrong. A cunning and illegal bit of treachery by the Obama White House turned into something entirely different. Obama’s October surprise turned into a carnage orchestrated by the White House itself as the President, Leon Panetta, and CIA Director, David Petraeus watched via a UAV real-time feed as a 7 hour attack on the Benghazi Embassy raged. Reportedly, stand down orders were given several times to different units within striking distance.

A plot of pure deception

With what should have been only a staged kidnapping of Ambassador J. Christian Stevens, instead, Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty refused a stand down order and began doing their job of protecting the ambassador using force. Immediately the well-trained Seals began inflicting heavy casualties upon the terrorists who thought they were merely in a cake walk to abduct Ambassador Stevens without mishap. As a result of the plan going awry, a massive attack arose from the anger of the terrorists who felt they had been betrayed by President Obama. In the aftermath of the battle which saw Navy Seal Glen Doherty was killed after the embassy had been overrun along with the ambassador’s staff. Ambassador Steven’s whose body showed up 5 hours later at a Benghazi hospital supposedly overcome by smoke as the initial press reports indicated was, in fact, raped, tortured, and dragged around Benghazi in retaliation for the botched Obama White House plan.

Obama hands over Libya to Al Qaeda

Was this just a freak occurrence that belies the true nature of dealings in Libya with American diplomatic efforts, just one glitch in normal standard operating procedure? No, according to former Admiral Lyons and many others such as Glen Beck, who have all uncovered evidence that lead to much more sinister deeds being undertaken. Evidence of a working relationship between the US and its alleged terrorist enemies had already delivered Libya to the Al Qaeda terrorist organization through infiltration of the government, media, and general society prior to the rebellion against Muammar Gaddafi that toppled the dictator last year. That the US has worked with Al Qaeda awarding them security contracts for all US embassies and consulates as well as border protection has instead allowed Libya to become a haven for numerous terrorist operators who have automatic access to Libya’s territory to carry out their training. All this with the support and blessing of the Obama administration. This is not only unthinkable, but beyond excuse or rationalization. There should already be indictments for many in the state department, in the DOJ, all the way up to the oval office, yet, so far nothing has been done.

Treason plain and simple

It goes even farther than that. Evidence indicates that Ambassador Stevens was being used as an arms dealer to supply Jihadists in the region to support yet another uprising in Syria. Just prior to the murder of our ambassador, he was trying to locate guns that had been walked across Libya’s border to other countries just as the ATF had done in operation Fast and Furious on the border of Mexico. These are not the actions of inexperience or bad intelligence. They are the actions of traitorous intention. President Obama will, no doubt, be linked to these deaths and operations if Congress will only act, and do its duty in prosecuting a treasonous president who is endangering national security.

There is no where else for a Congressional investigation to turn other than naming the conspirators, determining when officials knew, and assembling the evidence that murder was committed on behalf of the White House to silence those who knew and could testify. Through out the Obama presidency over the last four years the administration has master minded operations that have caused numerous controversies and crises.

When will the GOP take action?

The Republicans have missed opportunities to discredit the President, to impeach Obama in the wake of waging war against Libya without Congressional approval, and allowed executive privilege to  quash subpoenaed demands for evidence on Fast and Furious never released by AG Eric Holder. John Boehner, Speaker of the House, has refused to exercise initiative whenever the GOP could have used much-needed momentum to stem the tide against the incessant assaults against state’s rights, constitutional rights, and the traditional institutions of America. Will the recent damning evidence now uncovered over the Benghazi fiasco thanks to Admiral James Lyons be implemented to convict the President of potential high treason, or will we see yet another case of criminal acts ignored and hidden at the expense of the American people? If you bother to take interest and act as a responsible citizens contact your congressman and demand action!

 

The most honest athlete in America? Baseball player overpaid by $500 THOUSAND returns cash to his team

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.dailymail.co.uk

Posted by DAILY MAIL REPORTER

Jeremy Affeldt just may be the most honest athlete in America.

In 2010, the relief pitcher for the San Francisco Giants says he was overpaid by $500,000 thanks to a contract error that wrongly awarded him $4.5 million instead of the $4 million previously agreed upon. Sealing the deal, the mistake was signed off by both him and his team before it was caught.

When Affeldt realized the 12.5 percent pay increase he says he returned the extra money and asked that his contract be rewritten.

Honest man: Jeremy Affeldt of the San Francisco Giants claims that in 2010 his team over paid him by $500,000 but catching the mistake he gave it back and asked for a new contract

Admission: Affeldt reveals the pricy clerical error in his new book, To Stir a Movement, while describing his agent, the Players Association and the Giant’s assistant general manager all telling him he could keep the money

Affeldt, who describes himself as an avid Christian and father, details the six-digit mistake in his new book, To Stir a Movement.

He claims that the Players Association, his agent Michael Moye as well as Giants assistant general manager Bobby Evans all approved of him keeping the $500,000 after he brought it to their attention.

As he recalls of his agent’s reaction in his book, recently reviewed by the San Francisco Chronicle:

‘You know what? As your agent I’ve got to tell you that legally you can keep it. As a man who represents integrity, I’m saying you should give it back.’

And that’s exactly what he did.

‘I talked to Bobby the next day and said, “I can’t take that money,” Affeldt writes. ‘”I won’t sleep well at night knowing I took that money because every time I open my pay check I’ll know it’s not right.”‘

Other life: Affeldt, who has pitched with the Giants during their last two World Series wins over the last three years, publicly shows himself as a Christian and a family man

Affeldt sat down and had the contract re-written, subtracting $500,000 from his pay.

Last winter Affeldt signed a new $18 million three-year contract with the Giants.

He believes he was given the more than 4-fold pay raise because of his honesty and ultimate decision.

Others note the Giant’s winning two World Series in the last three years as a likely reason as well.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325853/Jeremy-Affelft-Baseball-player-overpaid-500K-returns-cash-San-Francisco-Giants.html#ixzz2TW4QZmUy

 

The IRS wants YOU ; to share everything

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.politico.com

Posted by DAVID NATHER, TARINI PARTI and BYRON TAU

The Internal Revenue Service asked tea party groups to see donor rolls.

It asked for printouts of Facebook posts.

Acting IRS Commissioner dodges questions

Reid on IRS: ‘Not the first time’

And it asked what books people were reading.

WHY?

A POLITICO review of documents from 11 tea party and conservative groups that the IRS scrutinized in 2012 shows the agency wanted to know everything — in some cases, it even seemed curious what members were thinking. The review included interviews with groups or their representatives from Hawaii, New Mexico, Ohio, Texas and elsewhere.

The long-awaited Treasury Department inspector general report released Tuesday says the agency itself decided some of its questions to conservative groups were way over the line — especially the one about donors.

(Also on POLITICO: Watchdog: IRS used ‘inappropriate criteria’)

The report shows that top IRS officials put a stop to some of the questions in early 2012, including the ones that asked tea party groups who their donors were, what issues were important to them and whether their top officers ever planned to run for office. And they told the investigators they planned to destroy the donor lists that had already been sent in.

But interviews with members of the groups paint a more dramatic picture than the bland language of the report, which just says the IRS “requested irrelevant (unnecessary) information because of a lack of managerial review, at all levels, of questions before they were sent to organizations seeking tax-exempt status.”

“They were asking for a U-Haul truck’s worth of information,” said Toby Marie Walker, the president of the Waco Tea Party.

(Also on POLITICO: White House stuck on IRS scandal response)

Some groups even gave up in the face of the IRS questions.

Several of the groups were asked for résumés of top officers and descriptions of interviews with the media. One group was asked to provide “minutes of all board meetings since your creation.”

Some of the letters asked for copies of the groups’ Web pages, blog posts and social media postings — making some tea party members worry they’d be punished for their tweets or Facebook comments by their followers.

(PHOTOS: 10 slams on the IRS)

And each letter had a stern warning about “penalties of perjury” — which became intimidating for groups that were being asked about future activities, like future donations or endorsements.

In one instance, the American Patriots Against Government Excess was asked to provide summaries or copies of all material passed out at meetings. The group had been reading “The 5000 Year Leap” by Cleon Skousen and the U.S. Constitution.

The group’s president, Marion Bower, sent a copy of both to the IRS. “I don’t have time to write a book report for them,” she said.

The Albuquerque Tea Party was asked about connections to other groups — Conspiracy Brews, Marianne Chiffelle’s Breakfasts, Concerned Citizens for Limited Government, Concerned Citizens for Common Sense.

The Hawaii Tea Party was about Dylan Nonaka, the former head of the Hawaii Republican Party.

Some were asked about any connection to Americans for Prosperity, a nonprofit group backed by the Koch brothers that ironically never underwent the same level of IRS scrutiny.

And then they asked whether one group knew Justin Binik-Thomas.

Never heard of him? He’s a former leader of the Cincinnati Tea Party, and clearly someone in the Cincinnati IRS office knew who he was.

So when the Liberty Township Tea Party applied for tax-exempt status, the IRS threw this question into its March 2011 letter to the group: “Provide details regarding your relationship with Justin Binik-Thomas.” (They didn’t know him well enough to spell his name right.)

In an interview Tuesday, Binik-Thomas said he has never worked with the Liberty group and isn’t sure why the IRS asked that group about him — although he says it’s “possible that they just Goggled ‘tea party’ and assumed that we’re all the same.”

But Binik-Thomas said it was a chilling experience when the Liberty group told him his name was in their letter — because now he wonders what else the IRS has in store for him.

“Will my personal taxes get audited? Will my small-business taxes get audited? Am I a pawn to try to get at another group?” Binik-Thomas asked.

“There are a lot of people involved in the tea party. Why was I isolated from thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people? Why was I singled out?”

Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California-Irvine and an election law expert and blogger, said that it’s the IRS’s job to ensure that these groups are not primarily involved in campaign-related activities. “So it has taken a murky rule and tried to resolve disputes about status in some cases using a very fact-intensive and intrusive inquiry,” he said.

“It would be far better for the IRS — or even better, Congress — to have a bright line rule about who has to disclose what and keep the IRS out of this line of inquiry,” Hasen added. “For example, make every group regardless of tax status disclose major donors funding election ads to the FEC. That’s it. Then there would be no reason for political groups to take the (c)(4) status and the pressure would be off the IRS.”

The IRS investigations took time. Several conservative group leaders spoke of 18 months or more of delays, only to get missives in early 2012 demanding answers to detailed questions within a few weeks.

“The thing that would characterize the attitude of the IRS was silence. We submitted our application, and it would be almost a year before we would get an answer back,” said Laurence Nordvig, the executive director of the Richmond Tea Party. “It’s not like we were talking to someone every day and they were being polite or rude. We weren’t hearing from them at all.”

The Richmond group first applied for 501(c)(4) status in December 2009 and got final approval in July 2012.

The letters came from IRS offices in Ohio, California and Washington, D.C. And one letter — to American Patriots Against Government Excess — came under the name of Lois Lerner, the director of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations office. Lerner was the IRS official who announced last Friday the agency had singled out certain groups for review based on search terms like “tea party” and “patriot.”

Tea party groups felt that the requests for donors were particularly intrusive.

“They were asking for the names of the donors, which is exactly the opposite of what we were looking for because if people knew their names would be made public or known to the government, they stop giving,” said Nordvig.

“Why do you even need that? There’s no reason your tax status should depend on your donors,” Littleton said.

Toby Marie Walker, the president of the Waco Tea Party, says her group applied for 501(c)(4) status in July 2010 and didn’t get a response from the IRS until February 2012 — when it sent a letter with 20 questions, including requests for printouts of its Web page and social networking sites.

It also wanted copies of all newsletters, bulletins and fliers, as well as any stories written about the group.

“They were killing trees right and left,” Walker said.

The IRS also asked for transcripts of radio shows where her group had mentioned political candidates by name — a job she figured would have cost her group $25,000. And it asked whether her group had “a close relationship” with any candidates or parties, a question she considered especially vague.

Walker said her group eventually got the questions knocked back a bit, with the help of the American Center for Law and Justice — and the IRS agreed to drop items like the Web page and Facebook printouts.

In January, Walker said, the Waco Tea Party submitted its final responses to the IRS — and in March, it won its tax-exempt status. By that point, she didn’t really feel like celebrating.

“It was a win, but I didn’t feel like it was a win, because it took us 18 months,” Walker said.

Chris Littleton, one of the co-founders of the Ohio Liberty Coalition, said the group got a grilling from the IRS when it submitted its application, in letters the group has posted on its website. The IRS also gave him so much grief when he tried to apply for tax-exempt status for another group, American Junto, that “we just gave up on it,” he said.

But when he submitted an application for a third group — Ohioans for Health Care Freedom, now renamed Ohio Rising — “it went through just fine,” Littleton said. “They never asked a single set of questions.”

Julie Hodges of the Mississippi Tea Party said the group has less than $800 in its account and relied on volunteer lawyers to deal with the IRS. It withdrew its application for 501(c)(4) status in early 2012, citing the delays and questions.

“The government is harassing us over a political position,” Hodges said.

The Greater Phoenix Tea Party Patriots applied in January 2010, and two years later, received an inquiry from the IRS with 35 questions.

“I do recall our co-founder called the IRS and the agent on the phone pretended he had our case file open in front him,” said the group’s president, Chris Rossiter. “Then she asked him a question, and he said, ‘What’s your group’s name again?’”

Several said that because the tea party groups constantly spoke to each other, it was easy to see they were all getting the same questions from IRS.

“It was a mistake for the IRS to take on the tea party because what we do is organize, so we’re going to figure out we were getting the same letters,” Rossiter said.

Lauren French contributed to this report.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/the-irs-wants-you-to-share-everything-91378_Page3.html#ixzz2TND46SVl

 

Colorado Democratic lawmakers face recall efforts for votes on gun control

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from FoxNews.com

• 

  FILE: March, 20, 2013: Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signs gun control bills into law in his office at the state capitol in Denver, Colo. (REUTERS)

Colorado Democratic lawmakers who recently helped pass some of the toughest gun-control laws in the country now face the political backlash of recall efforts.

Two groups are targeting state Rep. Mike McLachlan and state Sens. Angela Giron, Evie Hudak and John Morse.

The Democrat-controlled legislature passed bills that ban magazines holding more than 15 rounds and require background checks for all gun transfers. They were signed into law in March by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper.

Morse, the Senate president, pushed a more far-reaching proposal that called for holding owners, sellers and makers of assault-type weapons liable for havoc inflicted by their guns.

He pulled the bill upon realizing he didn’t have enough votes. But his efforts have still drawn the ire of the groups.  

The petition drives are being organized by the organizations Pueblo Freedom and Rights Group. They will need signatures from 25 percent of the vote in each lawmaker’s district to trigger a special election. 

The signature deadline is May 21. Colorado’s Secretary of State office confirmed with FoxNew.com that it has approved the forms for the petition drives.

The legislature also passed a bill before adjourning Friday that prohibits domestic-violence offenders from owning guns.And Hickenlooper is also expected to sign that legislation.

Morse is getting help from a group called “A Whole Lot of People for John Morse,” which is collecting money and petition signatures to fight the recall effort. The group has so far raised $23,050, according to The Daily Caller.

Connecticut, Maryland and New York also have passed tighter gun-control measures following the Dec. 2012 mass shooting at a Connecticut school in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed. However, there are no indications of organized recall efforts in those Democratic-leaning states.

Hudak angered gun-rights advocates and others, beyond her support for tighter firearms control, because of a comment to a rape victim testifying against a bill that would have banned concealed weapons on college campuses.

She suggested the attacker might have used the gun on the woman had she been carrying a concealed weapon, saying “statistics are not on your side even if you had a gun.”

The bill was pulled and Hudak apologized.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/08/colorado-democratic-lawmakers-face-recall-efforts-for-votes-on-gun-control/#ixzz2T7AtonRM

 

Slain diplomat’s mom on Obama’s Benghazi comments: ‘Bullfeathers’

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.washingtontimes.com

Posted by David Eldridge

 

“Bullfeathers!”

That was the reaction to President Obama’s Benghazi comments Monday from the mother of one of the State Department diplomats killed in the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack in Libya.

In an interview with Union-Tribune TV on Monday afternoon, Pat Smith said she doesn’t believe the administration is telling the truth about the attack that claimed the lives of four Americans, including her 34-year-old son, information officer Sean Smith.

“They sacrificed him for their own political gains. I don’t like that, I don’t think anybody in this United States could ever possibly like that,” she said.

“I think they were trying … to show how nice we were and that we trust them and we like them all and so they pulled all their security out of there. I think that’s what happened. Because Hillary [Clinton] or whoever was going to go in there and say, ‘see how wonderful we are.’”

Responding to the president’s Monday afternoon remarks on Benghazi, in which Mr. Obama said, “We were not able to prevent their deaths.”

That comment drew the “bullfeathers” reaction from the San Diego mom who has grown increasingly frustrated with the administration’s handling of the investigation into her son’s death.

“I know they could have. I can’t prove a lot of if, but I know they could have,” she said.

A day earlier, in an interview on Fox News that has is getting widespread buzz online, Mrs. Smith wished Mrs. Clinton a happy Mother’s Day because, “She’s got her child. I don’t have mine, because of her.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/may/13/slain-diplomat-mom-obama-benghazi-bullfeathers/#ixzz2TFROcrq5

Rise of the Obama ;Reich;

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://canadafreepress.com

Posted by Paula Helton

    The time has come for Americans to stop bending to the will of the PC enablers and define the Obama Administration for what it is;

The Obama Reich. How else to describe the eerily similar parallels of Barack Obama and Adolph Hitler?

There are numerous comparisons to be made. In writing this, I focused on four of them.

Hitler Youth

When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already…What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”…Mein Kampf

An excerpt from a History Place article titled “Hitler’s Boy Soldiers – 1939-1945” gives us a chilling look at the Hitler Youth.

“From 1940 to 1945, about 2.8 million German children were sent to these camps. There were separate KLV camps for boys and girls. Some 5,000 camps were eventually in operation, varying greatly in sizes from the smallest which had 18 children to the largest which held 1,200. Each camp was run by a Nazi approved teacher and a Hitler Youth squad leader. The camps replaced big city grammar schools, most of which were closed due to the bombing. Reluctant parents were forced to send their children away to the camps.

Life inside the boys’ camp was harsh, featuring a dreary routine of roll calls, paramilitary field exercises,hikes, marches, recitation of Nazi slogans and propaganda, along with endless singing of Hitler Youth songs and Nazi anthems. School work was neglected while supreme emphasis was placed on the boys learning to automatically snap-to attention at any time of the day or night and to obey all orders unconditionally “without any if or buts.”

Obama Youth

The use of songs and chants to brainwash the youth of America has also been the method of choice for Barack Obama. Videos of very young children singing his praises can be found here , here, here and here .

Obama, however, has decided that our children must be indoctrinated at an even younger age as documented in this speech, wherein he demands universal pre-school.

The further indoctrination of college students occurred in his recent address to graduates at Ohio State University. In the speech found here, he admonished the students “Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems; some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.” Whose voices are they to reject; the Founding Fathers, their parents, grandparents, etc.?

The speech at Ohio State also offers further proof that Mr. Obama knows nothing of our Country, as evidenced by his many instances of referring to us a Democracy. Perhaps We the People can aid in Barack’s education by forwarding on to him this explanation of who and what we are:

“When Benjamin Franklin emerged from Independence Hall in Philadelphia at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, he was approached by a Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia. It was then and there that she asked the now famous question, “Well, Doctor, what have we, a republic or a monarchy?” It is said that Dr. Franklin, without hesitation, said, “A Republic, ma’am, if you can keep it.”

To further enlighten our poser in the White House, Merriam Webster Dictionary of Law defines Republic thusly: a Republic is “a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.” In other words, a Republic is a system of government where the ultimate power lies with the people; that power executed by way of elected representatives who are responsible to those who elected them and according to the rule of law.

Hitler’s Gestapo

From a United States Holocaust Memorial Museum articled titled, “Nazi Terror Begins”, we learn the following:

“Essential to the intimidating effects of the terror was the willingness of many German citizens (whether out of conviction, greed, envy, or vengeance) to denounce their fellow citizens, Jewish and non-Jewish, to the police. The Gestapo could not have exercised such control over German society without the benefit of this steady stream of denunciations, many of which were entirely unfounded.”

Obama’s Gestapo

Not to be outdone by Hitler’s Gestapo, “Big Sis” Napolitano announced her ”IF YOU SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING” CAMPAIGN, states:

The “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign—originally implemented by New York City’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority and now licensed to DHS for a nationwide campaign—is a simple and effective program to engage the public and key frontline employees to identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to the proper transportation and law enforcement authorities.

WASHINGTON—Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano announced new partnerships between the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) “If You See Something, Say Something™” public awareness campaign and several sports organizations and collegiate universities. Partnerships include National Football League (NFL) teams, Major League Baseball (MLB) teams, the U.S. Open Tennis Championships (USTA), Ohio State University, and the University of Oklahoma.

Over the past year, DHS has collaborated closely with federal, state, local and private sector partners, as well as the Department of Justice, to expand the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign and the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative—an administration effort to train state and local law enforcement to recognize behaviors and indicators related to terrorism, crime and other threats; standardize how those observations are documented and analyzed; and ensure the sharing of those reports with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) led Joint Terrorism Task Forces for further investigation.

Other partnerships with the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign have been recently launched by the states of Florida and Maryland, the cities of Baltimore and Newark, the Inaugural Baltimore Grand Prix, and state and major urban area fusion centers across the country.

DHS will continue to expand the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign nationally to help America’s business, communities and citizens remain vigilant and play an active role in keeping the country safe.

A 2009 article from the Washington Times described a new Department of Homeland Security Report this way:

“The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in “rightwing extremist activity,” saying the economic recession, the election of America’s first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias.

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines “rightwing extremism in the United States” as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.

“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the warning says.

The nine-page document was sent to police and sheriff’s departments across the United States on April 7 under the headline, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.”

It says the federal government “will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months” to gather information on “rightwing extremist activity in the United States.”

The joint federal-state activities will have “a particular emphasis” on the causes of “rightwing extremist radicalization.”

The nine page DHS report can be found here

Ric Bradshaw, a Palm Beach County Sheriff anxious to do his part to encourage his constituents to become spies for the Obama Gestapo, was recently awarded one million dollars by the Florida Legislature. As for what the funds will be used for, Sheriff Bradshaw summed it up in this article from the Palm Beach Post :

“We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,” Bradshaw said. “What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?”

Mein Fuhrer would be proud!

Hitler’s SS

“The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force.”…Mein Kampf

Another excerpt from “Nazi Terror Begins” points out the intimidation tactics used by by the Hitler SS to silence his opponents:

“Hitler and the Nazi regime also resorted to simple and extra-legal terror to intimidate opponents. Nazi paramilitary formations, such as the Storm Detachments (Sturmabteilungen or SA, more commonly known as Storm Troopers) and the Protection Squads (Schutzstaffel or SS), had been established during the 1920s to terrorize political opponents and to protect Nazi leaders.”

Obama’s IR’SS’

In order to ensure the Obama regime can steal the amount of wealth from American citizens it feels it is entitled to, Obama’s 2012 budget calls for the hiring of 5100 more IRSS agents, bringing the total number of agents to over 100,000. It also calls for increasing their budget by 12%, for a total IRSS budget of $13 billion. Details can be found in a Washington Examiner article titled, ”Obama ‘12 budget: More IRS agent pit bulls for tax and health care fraud”.

I would say it’s time for We the People to demand a flat tax and eliminate the IRSS. Picturing the IRSS agents standing in unemployment lines is the stuff dreams are made of.

The IRSS will also be the stormtroopers tasked with enforcing Obacare. To accomplish terrorizing and intimidating American citizens and businesses, the bill calls for an additional 16,000 IRSS agents. In this CNBC article, we learn the extent of the power Obama has given his IRSS troopers.

That brings us to the latest abuse of power welded by the IRSS. In a play strait from the Fuhrer’s handbook, Obama has used his IRSS thugs to intimidate conservative groups with the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, as well as those having concerns about debt or taxes, government spending, or educating citizens on the Constitution. An article from the Wall Street Journal, titled “Wider Problems Found at IRS, examines exactly what transpired, as the ensuing attempt to cover it up.

Famed conservative talk radio host, Mark Levin, revealed last week he was also a target of Obama’s goons. He also shone the light on the fact these stormtroopers are armed and defended packing heat by claiming “we’re law enforcement.”

But, not to worry, today Mr. Obama pronounced his outrage and vowed to get to the bottom of it. Seems I’ve heard that song before.

Hitler’s Sheltering in Place

The documentation of Hitler’s Ghettos and Death Camps is ongoing, as decribed in this recent New York Times article

“The documented camps include not only “killing centers” but also thousands of forced labor camps, where prisoners manufactured war supplies; prisoner-of-war camps; sites euphemistically named “care” centers, where pregnant women were forced to have abortions or their babies were killed after birth; and brothels, where women were coerced into having sex with German military personnel.

Auschwitz and a handful of other concentration camps have come to symbolize the Nazi killing machine in the public consciousness. Likewise, the Nazi system for imprisoning Jewish families in hometown ghettos has become associated with a single site—the Warsaw Ghetto, famous for the 1943 uprising. But these sites, infamous though they are, represent only a minuscule fraction of the entire German network, the new research makes painfully clear.

The maps the researchers have created to identify the camps and ghettos turn wide sections of wartime Europe into black clusters of death, torture and slavery—centered in Germany and Poland, but reaching in all directions.

The lead editors on the project, Geoffrey Megargee and Martin Dean, estimate that 15 million to 20 million people died or were imprisoned in the sites that they have identified as part of a multivolume encyclopedia. (The Holocaust museum has published the first two, with five more planned by 2025.”

Another excerpt from Nazi Terror Begins recounts, “In the months after Hitler took power, SA and Gestapo agents went from door to door looking for Hitler’s enemies. They arrested Socialists, Communists, trade union leaders, and others who had spoken out against the Nazi party; some were murdered. By the summer of 1933, the Nazi party was the only legal political party in Germany. Nearly all organized opposition to the regime had been eliminated. Democracy was dead in Germany”

Obama’s Sheltering in Place

“All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those towards whom it is directed will understand it. Therefore, the intellectual level of the propaganda must be lower the larger the number of people who are to be influenced by it.”…Mein Kampf

I first became aware of the term “shelter in place” during the manhunt for the Boston Marathon Bombers. I was astounded that nearly one million people followed the order to stay confined to their homes and the city of Boston was completely shut down. Think about how easy it was to convince an entire city to obey the directive to “shelter in place” as armed government agents blocked off all points of exit.

The full unbelievable account of American citizens, in a city known for it’s contribution to the American Revolution, allowing themselves to be confined in their homes can be found in this NBC news article

Watching dumbfounded the continuing coverage of “sheltering in place”, I wanted to discover if this was phenomenon was occurring elsewhere. Apparently it’s occurring all across America. A few of the instances I found can be found here , here, here, here http://libertyfirewall.com/2013/04/29/houston-shelter-in-place-after-warehouse-fire/>herehere, and even at the U.S. Naval Acamedy

Of course coverage of the “shelter in place” in the Boston suburb of Waterton wouldn’t be complete without also mentioning the armed SWAT teams that roamed the streets, dragging residents from their homes and conducting warrantless searches of their homes. Video and pictures can be found here and here

I find little difference between the actions of these SWAT teams and the Hitler SA and SS. How easy would it have been to install barricades and fencing and wall the people in?

If you have a little time on your hands, more interesting reading on Hitler and Nazi Germany can be found in the “The Nazification of German Society” By Jake Cmarada.

Hopefully more Americans will start connecting the dots in Obama’s quest to become our Mein Fuhrer. For the sake of this country, it needs to happen soon.

I leave you with this from an event in Florida as reported by Mike Synan, WOFL Fox 35 reporter:

Crowd Chants “Hail Obama”

Hundreds of people at a Florida campaign rally in featuring First Lady Michelle Obama began chanting “Hail Obama”, according to a television reporter who was covering the event.

“Crowd for #FLOTUS event in Daytona now chanting “Hail Obama,” tweeted WOFL Fox 35 reporter Mike Synan. “Wow, just wow.”

The rally was held at Daytona Beach’s Ocean Center. More than 5,000 people showed up—the crowd described as restless and boisterous.

Synan said the chanting came during a warm up session before the First Lady appeared on stage.

He repeated the claim in a follow-up message on Twitter, “True. Would not lie. Chanting “Hail Obama.”

Synan later said someone in the crowd would yell “Hail Obama” and then “hundreds that could hear that person would repeat.”

 

Press Starts to Turn on Obama Over Benghazi

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://godfatherpolitics.com

Posted by Tad Cronn

Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but I sense a disturbance in the Force.

In recent days, we’ve been treated to renewed hearings on the Benghazi cover-up, with witnesses who have been suppressed by the Obama Administration starting to come forward and detail how badly the public has been lied to.

Then the mainstream media, or at least some individuals and elements within it, have begun putting aside the I Heart Barry buttons and covering the story that’s been simmering for some eight months.

That was followed by rumors from some corners of the capital, including some Democrats speaking anonymously, that the Man Who Would Be King might be in trouble finally.

These facts alone were enough to generate a feeling that something had changed in the Halls of Power, that perhaps Obama’s hold on the Oval Office is not as strong as it once was.

Now come two events that would have been unthinkable even a week or two ago.

First, ABC News has come out with its story that the Obama Administration scrubbed the original CIA talking points of any reference to terrorism, and backed it up with copies of 12 different versions of the talking points that altogether prove that the White House and State Department knew from the beginning that al-Qaida was involved in the Benghazi attacks.

Second, in the wake of ABC’s story, the BBC has apologized for its coverage — or lack thereof — of the Benghazi story.

Mark Mardell, the BBC’s North American editor, wrote in an article titled “After Benghazi Revelations, Heads Will Roll” that he’s changed his mind about the Benghazi story now that ABC’s spoken up.

“In the interests of full disclosure I have to say I have not in the past been persuaded that allegations of a cover-up were a big deal. … It seemed to me a partisan attack based on very little.

“This is the first hard evidence that the state department did ask for changes to the CIA’s original assessment. …

“There’s little doubt in my mind that this will haunt Hillary Clinton if she decides to run for president, unless she executes some pretty fancy footwork.”

It should do more than haunt Hillary Clinton; it should decimate this Administration and if justice were to prevail, drive this president from office.

The line “We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack” is one of the parts the State Department had struck, along with any references to CIA warnings in the months leading up to the deaths of four Americans.

That shows an Administration that is willfully giving terrorists a pass when it comes to national security and foreign operations, then covering its tail when things inevitably go south.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. If the media were to really start doing their jobs at long last, they would uncover an Administration that has colluded with al-Qaida terrorists around the globe while pretending to fight them in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

The Administration and the media may yet choose to continue the cover-up. As the Benghazi hearings wound down on Friday, Democrats were circling the wagons, claiming there was no evidence of cover-up. The White House was planning a confidential briefing on Benghazi with select members of the Press Corps, and Politico predictably had already declared the ABC report a “distraction.” The State Department has decided its official line is that the Benghazi hearings haven’t revealed anything new.

In one sense, that’s true, because this information has been circulating for some time.

What’s changed is that this is the first time a large (mostly liberal) portion of the population will hear it because they’ve been trained to ignore anything not from the sanctioned left-wing media.

The other thing that’s changed is that the opening of the discussion by first CBS, then ABC, then the BBC may finally put pressure on the rest of the press corps zombies to wake up and look at reality for a change.

If that happens, it may set a dangerous precedent — dangerous to the people in Washington who count on the public to remain blissfully unaware of what’s been going on.

Read more: http://godfatherpolitics.com/10778/press-starts-to-turn-on-obama-over-benghazi/#ixzz2SwSHsCgT

 

Treasonous President Obama to Charge 14 Governors with Treason?

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://godfatherpolitics.com

Posted by Dave Jolly

It has been repeatedly reported on some of our websites that President Barack Hussein Obama is guilty of multiple accounts of treason against the people and Constitution of the United States.  He has not been charged with any of his many crimes because he controls the US Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (Holder is just as guilty of treason as is Obama).  The rest of Congress seems too spineless or fearful to say or do anything about it.

But let someone else try to stand up against Obama’s crime syndicate and he’s the first one to start hollering treason.

It seems that a growing number of state governors are re-establishing State Defense Forces, also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves and State Militias.  These forces are under the direct authority of the governor of the state and are not subject to federal control.  They can be readily deployed in the case of any natural or man-made disasters.

As of 2010, 23 states and territories have organized State Defense Forces (SDFs) with approximately 14,000 people serving in them.  SDFs were established by federal and state law at the very beginning of our country’s history.  They have played important roles over the years in helping to defend our nation, however, due to many state budget deficits, SDFs are becoming a thing of the past.

The Heritage Foundation did a report on State Defense Forces back in 2010 and if you want to read more about their history, please click here.

According to a recent report, 14 governors have been working to reinstate SDFs in their states.  Governors Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and Rick Perry of Texas have been fronting the drive to get more states to re-establish their STFs.

The report goes on to say that each of the 14 governors have now supposedly received National Security Letters from the Obama administration demanding that they halt the formation of their SDFs or face possible charges of treason.  It seems that since Obama has drastically reduced the size of the military and their forces are stretched thin with troops still in Afghanistan and Iraq, that he is fearing rebellion from the states.  Further evidence of his fear of a rebellion or revolution is the fact that he has nationalized all of the state National Guard units.

Perhaps this is the reason that he has had the Department of Homeland Security purchase over 2 billion rounds of ammunition and thousands of fully automatic assault rifles.

It is typical of Obama to bully everyone who stands up to him and does not bow down and kiss their bottoms goodbye for him.  He’s tried this with many states when they passed voter ID laws.  He bullied and harassed Sheriff Joe Arpaio because he dared to defy Obama and investigate Obama’s birth certificate.

President Obama is the most corrupt and despicable president our country has ever had.  He considers himself to be above the law, above Congress and above the Constitution.  He is still actively engaged in giving aide and support to our enemies (Egypt for one) which are the definable terms for the charge of treason according to the US Constitution.  He is not acting as our president but rather our dictator.  He’s not any different than Fidel Castro or any other dictator in history.

If the report on the governors receiving National Security Letters is true, then America could well be on verge of a national showdown between state governors and the federal government.  What better way is it for Obama to rid himself of some of his most ardent state opposition leaders than to start charging them with treason, the very crime that he is guilty of several times over?

Read more: http://godfatherpolitics.com/10763/treasonous-president-obama-to-charge-14-governors-with-treason/#ixzz2SwPu5cAw

 

NRA-Gabrielle Giffords fight heats up

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.politico.com

Posted by ANNA PALMER

• 

The pre-2014 posturing on both sides is starting early. | Reuters

The Senate voted down a gun control measure last month, but the fight is just beginning.

The National Rifle Association and new pro-gun control groups headed by former Rep. Gabby Giffords and Michael Bloomberg are in an arms race since a background check bill narrowly failed in the Senate last month – ramping up their fundraising, airing attack ads and revving up their grassroots machines.

PHOTOS: Congressional career of Gabby Giffords

Giffords stars in gun control ad

There was a time when a failed gun bill might have quietly slipped off the stage. But the dynamics have shifted, since the NRA is no longer the only group in the gun debate with money, power and some signs of staying power.

(PHOTOS: Will these guns be banned again?)

On Wednesday morning, the NRA announced a $25,000 television week-long television ad buy to support Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican who’s been under attack by gun control groups on the airwaves and in town halls for her vote on the Senate bill.

Just hours later, Giffords’ gun control group, Americans for Responsible Solutions, hit back – announcing it raised more than $11 million in its first four months of operation – a staggering figure even in the age of super PACs and big outside money groups.

(PHOTOS: Gabrielle Giffords’s congressional career)

The early – and aggressive — posturing on both sides is a clear sign that guns aren’t gone in the run-up to the 2014 midterms.

“The resource mismatch was always extreme and now it is basically gone,” said Matt Bennett, of the moderate think tank Third Way, which supports strengthening gun control laws. “So you’ve got two heavy-weights and they are battling instead of a pushover against a champ.”

Giffords’ group couched their fundraising stats as evidence they’re here for the long-haul.

“Our early success at building a powerful network of committed activists – and the strength of that network – shows that the issue of reducing gun violence in America isn’t going away,” said ARS executive director and co-founder Pia Carusone. “The hundreds of thousands of members and donors who’ve joined Gabby and Mark in just our first four months show that Americans know that we can protect the 2nd amendment and make our communities safer. Americans want their elected officials to be honest and to lead with courage.”

(PHOTOS: Politicians speak out on gun control)

The group also reported it had 366,000 members and received donations from roughly 53,500 donors. The group did not respond to requests for information on donors and whether the bulk came from large contributors like the effort back by New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg.

Still, the NRA is a formidable force. Since the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., the NRA’s membership has grown to a record 5 million, according to the group’s president Wayne LaPierre. The group has also built up a veritable war chest, spending $18 million on the 2012 election.

Democrats suffered a decisive defeat in the Senate even on the compromise issue of background checks. And even if the groups on the left can change some minds in the Senate, it’s unclear gun control would even come to a vote in the House.

Meanwhile, the gun control movement’s pressure campaign is about to ramp up. Bloomberg’s group Mayor’s Against Illegal Guns has discussed going up with ads soon in Alaska, Arkansas and North Dakota. The decision would be significant since it means they would be attacking Democratic lawmakers.

Third Way’s Bennett said there was never even a thought of easing the pressure.

“This wasn’t like, oh, my God, we’re on the floor we have to regroup,” Bennett said. “The next step is to select a group of targets, pressure them, talk to them about what changes would be required to get their vote and move forward.”

Following the background check vote, Americans for Responsible Solutions also did four “thank you” ads applauding Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) for their vote. They also did two attack ads hitting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

The gun lobby isn’t taking the offensive sitting down.

In addition to the New Hampshire ad, the NRA is also prepping a nationwide member mailer with the same mail piece going to non-member lists in select states, including New Hampshire and Arizona, according to NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam.

And last week, NRA leaders warned thousands of members at the group’s annual meeting that President Barack Obama and gun control supporters are determined to take away some of their 2nd Amendment rights.

LaPierre told the crowd that the Senate background check measure “is but one skirmish in what can only be defined as one long war against our Constitutional rights.”

He promised that the NRA will go the distance in the fight, which he characterized as a “once in a generation fight for everything we care about.”

Still, the fundraising push isn’t necessarily a surprise. Often when social issues enter the fray in Congress or in the courts, groups will use the issue – whether it’s abortion or guns — to bring attention to their cause and raise money for it.

Veteran communications strategist Rich Masters said that while some of the effort is on public policy, much of these campaigns are about raising money.

“The NRA has not had a boogey man in many, many years. And so as a result for not having a boogey man they’ve made up all these boogey men,” Masters said. “The anti-gun crew also really hasn’t had a rally cry because they’ve been beaten down so long by the NRA.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/gun-control-nra-gabrielle-giffords-91099_Page2.html#ixzz2St9mkw5c

 

State Department orders firm to remove 3D-printed guns web blueprints

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.guardian.co.uk

Posted by Amanda Holpuch, Ewen MacAskill in New York and Charles Arthur in London

Defense Distributed tweeted on Thursday that ‘Liberator’ project had ‘gone dark’ at the request of government officials

• 

Fifteen of the gun’s 16 pieces are constructed on the $8,000 Stratasys Dimension SST 3D printer. Photograph: Defense Distributed/EPA

The US government has blocked a Texas-based company from distributing details online of how to make a plastic gun using a 3-D printer.

The ban, by the State Department citing international arms control law, comes just days after the world’s first such gun was successfully fired.

Defense Distributed, the company that made the prototype, stated on Twitter that its project had “gone dark” at the instigation of the government.

The company is run by Cody Wilson, a 25-year-old University of Texas law student who has said the idea for freely distributing details about how to produce the guns online was inspired by 19th century anarchist writing. Wilson argues everyone should have access to guns.

A State Department spokesman said: “Although we do not comment on whether we have individual ongoing compliance matters, we can confirm that the department has been in communication with the company.”

The action came too late to prevent widespread distribution of the files: Defense Distributed told Forbes that the files have already been downloaded more than 100,000 times in the two days since they were uploaded. The largest number of downloads initially were to addresses in Spain, followed by the US, Brazil, Germany and the UK.

Fifteen of the gun’s 16 pieces are constructed on the $8,000 Stratasys Dimension SST 3D printer, Forbes said. The final piece is a common nail, used as a firing pin, that can be found in a hardware store.

Betabeat posted a copy of the letter reportedly sent by the Department of State to Wilson. The department said the blueprints had to be taken offline because they may contain data regulated by the State Department. The department said it would review the files.

“I immediately complied and I’ve taken down the files,” Wilson told Betabeat. “But this is a much bigger deal than guns. It has implications for the freedom of the web.”

Defense Distributed does not host the files in the US; instead it has uploaded them to the Mega website run by the internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom, based in New Zealand, and where user information – including who has logged into the site and downloaded files – is encrypted.

The files have also been uploaded to the Pirate Bay file-sharing site, where they have proved a popular download.

The gun blueprints take the form of computer-aided design files, which have to be read by specialist software which can then be used by industrial 3D printers to build up the hair-thin layers, one by one, to create the finished parts.

On Thursday, a British expert in 3D printing and a ballistics expert separately warned that building a gun from the parts could be lethal to the user, because the physics involved in firing a bullet – with pressures in the gun chamber of more than 1,000 atmospheres, and temperatures of over 200C – could put catastrophic stresses on the plastics used it its construction.

Even so, two British newspapers are understood to have asked 3D printing companies to try to build the gun for them.

In the US, a reporter who downloaded the file found that companies with sufficient 3D printing capability refused to produce the device, citing laws against the production of such weapons – or asking prices that were substantially higher than those for high-quality rifles available in shops.

Wilson has been on a public mission to create a 3D printed gun since September 2012. He initially attempted to fund the project using crowdsourcing site Indiegogo, but the site removed his pitch for breaching the company’s rules. Wilson then raised $20,000 in Bitcoins for the project but Stratasys repossessed his printer.

He has since gained access to a second Stratasys printer which was presumably used to create the gun fired over the weekend.

Wilson unsuccessfully applied for a federal firearms license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and has said he wants to create the gun legally. On Sunday, New York senator Charles Schumer said that legislation should be created to prevent people from making 3D printed guns.

 

The Enemy Within Lives at the White House

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from clashdaily.com

Posted by Allan Erickson

According to Obama’s advisor on religious tolerance within the U.S. military, Christians sharing their faith, including chaplains, present “… a national security threat. What is happening [aside from sexual assault] is spiritual rape. And what the Pentagon needs is to understand is that it is sedition and treason. It should be punished.”

Criminalize Christianity as an official policy of the federal government pertaining to military personnel?

It is a short distance from that to jailing pastors, as they already do in Iran. Once the government grossly violates the 1st Amendment, preferring one group over another, it can prosecute anyone deemed a ‘threat to national security.’ The Constitution says the government shall not infringe upon the free exercise of religion. This president has no respect for the Constitution.

And they said it could never happen in the USA.

The only force on earth that has effectively stood against 1,300 years of Muslim aggression: Christians and Christian armies.

And what does the Obama administration do in the face of Muslim war declared against the U.S.?

He threatens to court-martial all U.S. military personnel, including chaplains, if they share their faith, at the same time normalizing homosexual practice within the ranks, both demoralization moves that undermine military readiness. What kind of a commander in chief does such things?

Additionally, this administration is weaponizing a civilian force, preparing to respond with violence in the event of domestic unrest.

In view of all this, and his overt policies that accommodate terrorists and state sponsors of terror, and his obvious efforts to destroy our form of government, our rights, and our economy, all these combine, pointing to one conclusion: he is the enemy within.

When will a champion of the people step forward to impeach this traitor? Better yet, when will the people step forward to demand liberty and justice, for all.

Read more: http://clashdaily.com/2013/05/the-enemy-within-lives-at-the-white-house/#ixzz2SsqoSiDO

.

 

BENGHAZI MAKES WATERGATE ‘LOOK LIKE KINDERGARTEN’

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.wnd.com

General: ‘A dereliction of duty this nation has never seen before’

Lt Gen Tom Mcinerney

Revelations in Wednesday’s congressional hearings on the Benghazi terrorist attacks prove it is a massive scandal that will carry significant consequences for those involved in the cover-up, according to retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney.

McInerney served at the highest levels in the Air Force, including time as assistant vice chief of staff and vice commander in chief of the U.S. Air Forces in Europe. He believes the Obama administration deliberately misled the American people on the motivation for the attack and is now covering its tracks on decisions to prevent a military rescue in Benghazi. He told WND that is more clear than ever following Wednesday’s testimony of former Deputy Chief of Mission Gregory Hicks and two others before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

“This is going to be the biggest scandal. It is going to make Watergate look like kindergarten because Watergate was primarily limited to the Oval Office. This cuts across the whole national security apparatus, where people were lying and covering up,” McInerney said. “It is a dereliction of duty that this nation has never seen before.”

So what consequences could that mean for the highest levels of the administration?

“Well, just see what the consequences were in Watergate. If it’s far worse than Watergate, the consequences will go right into the Oval Office,” he said.

McInerney said the tell-tale sign of Obama’s dereliction of duty can be determined in the admitted White House narrative of the president’s actions as the terrorist attack played out the night of Sept. 11, 2012.

“When is the exact minute he knew? We don’t have the timeline, and it was well before the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff went over there. He only talked to the secretary of defense one time, so it’s obvious he knew that he had given the stand-down order and did not need to talk to the secretary of defense or anybody else after that,” McInerney said. “Then he goes the next day out on a fundraising campaign to Las Vegas. That is a low for the commander in chief of this great nation.”

He also insists the stand-down order could only come from one source: the president himself.

“The only person who could have given it was the president, and he had to give it through the secretary of defense, secretary of state. The word came out so it came from the combatant commands and other unites below, but nobody could have given that except the president of the United States, and that is very clear,” said McInerney, who noted that the State Department’s own Accountability Review Board likely reached a similar conclusion in its report, which is why so few have seen it and the leaders of that study refuse to appear before Congress. McInerney believes they should be subpoenaed.

While he believes Obama has a lot to answer for, McInerney made it clear that many top-level subordinates deserve a lot of the blame too, and that’s what makes the scandal so troubling.

“It’s going to have significant consequences because it impacts two CIA directors, two secretaries of state, two chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, two secretaries of defense that are all involved now with the cover-up,” he said.

The general also singled out former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her comment at congressional hearings in January in which she bristled severely at accusations the administration concocted a plan to blame the attack on a spontaneous demonstration over an anti-Islam YouTube video that got out of hand. Clinton slammed Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, saying, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

McInerney sees that as a low point in American history.

“That is one of the most despicable statements that any American has said about such a tragic incident when you lose people like that. It makes a huge difference that our troops know that they will always be protected as much as they can and we’ll do anything to protect them,” he said. “She says, what difference does it make? That will live with her til the day she dies. I can tell you, all the people I know, both active and retired, think that is one of the most despicable statements we have ever heard a civilian leader say in our country’s history.”

McInerney said the administration’s story is full of holes on a number of fronts, including the narrative about the supposed video protests. But the general said his own experience serving in that theater convinces him there was plenty of time and opportunity to deploy U.S. forces to protect Americans in Benghazi.

“We have never done that, that I know, in our military history, where we just abandoned and did not try to send in rescue forces. They could have gotten there from Aviano (Air Base in Italy) the F-16s. I used to fly F-16s out of Aviano when I was vice commander in chief of U.S. Air Forces in Europe. I know that scene very well. They could have made it. They said they didn’t have tankers. They could have dropped their tanks. They could have recovered at a nearby Italian air base on an island,” he said.

“So it is unacceptable to me that we didn’t send those forces from Tripoli that we had there. We didn’t send F-16s and the FEST team to go in and to try to rescue those people. That was unacceptable, but from the get-go they had a narrative that they wanted to stick with that was a political narrative that the war was over, they had defeated al-Qaida,” he said.

IS THE BENGHAZI SCANDAL WORSE THAN WATERGATE?

• Yes, and the consequences for the president and those who enabled Benghazi-gate should be more severe than those of Watergate (44%, 375 Votes)
• Yes, Benghazi-gate was infinitely worse than the Watergate break-in. It’s truly in a league of its own (31%, 265 Votes)
• Yes, the Watergate burglars didn’t result in deaths, let alone the killings of an ambassador and 3 American heroes (8%, 72 Votes)
• Yes, the cold-hearted response to the crisis and the outrageous, ongoing cover-up far exceed Watergate (8%, 67 Votes)
• Yes, of course it is. But the left-leaning media will not hold this president accountable as they did with Nixon (7%, 58 Votes)
• No, Watergate was clearly a premeditated crime, and Benghazi was a combination of ineptitude and cover-up (less than 1%, 4 Votes)
• Yes, it’s as least as bad, and Watergate produced jail terms (less than 1%, 4 Votes)
• No, this is a ridiculous attempt by nutty right-wingers to advocate for Obama’s impeachment (less than 1%, 2 Votes)
• No, of course not. Watergate reached the highest level of the White House. Benghazi was a mishandling by the state department (less than 1%, 1 Votes)
• Yes, the cover-up in Benghazi is at least as disgraceful and documented as Watergate (less than 1%, 1 Votes)
• Other (less than 1%, 1 Votes)
• No, this is a political witch hunt to weaken Democrats before the 2014 election (0%, 0 Votes)
• No, and at this point, what difference does it make?! (0%, 0 Votes)
• No, I’m confident the Obama administration made the right call in Benghazi (0%, 0 Votes)
• No, Republicans will put ‘-gate’ at the end of any Obama issue (0%, 0 Votes)

Total Voters: 850

 

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/benghazi-makes-watergate-look-like-kindergarten/#3RGKwF3fU0ixdwF0.99

Nearly 70,000 Petition Administration to Tell the Truth About Benghazi, 25,000 in Past 24 Hours

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://cnsnews.com .

Posted by Craig Bannister

---

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) said today it has obtained nearly 70,000 signatures – 25,000 in just the past day – to a petition demanding the truth from the Obama Administration about the terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya eight months ago. That attack resulted in the assassination of a U.S. Ambassador and three other Americans.

“The Obama Administration has been stonewalling and withholding information about this attack from the very start,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ.

“We are now learning important new information from people who were on the ground on September 11, 2012. There are many critical questions facing the Obama Administration – including former Secretary of State Clinton.”

These questions include:

• Why did the State Department strip the Benghazi facility of security even as threats escalated?
• Did the Administration order rescuing forces to ‘stand down’ – leading to the deaths of brave Americans fighting for their lives, outgunned in a hostile land?
• Did the Administration lie to cover up its failures and downplay the terrorist threat in the middle of an election season?

“The American people deserve answers. The American people deserve the truth. It’s our hope that the hearing in the House tomorrow begins to uncover the real facts behind what happened in Benghazi – what our government knew and when,” Sekulow said.

“With continually changing stories and inaccurate accounts, the American people have been misled. Terrorists attacked American soil – our embassy – we need the truth and accountability,” the petition reads.

The ACLJ is notifying the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is conducting tomorrow’s hearing, about the petition response and will continue to add names in support of Congressional action to get to the bottom of what happened in Libya.

 

BENGHAZI BUZZ: OBAMA PREDICTED TO LEAVE OFFICE

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.wnd.com .

Posted by BOB UNRUH

More serious than Watergate ‘because 4 Americans did in fact die’

To this day, it is not known what role President Richard Nixon played in the break-in at the Watergate Hotel, but the tape recordings from the White House confirm he and Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman discussed using the CIA to slow down the FBI investigation.

It was the cover-up, as history records, that eventually brought about Nixon’s resignation in disgrace.

Now, Congress is investigating an alleged cover-up of the terrorist attack Sept. 11, 2012, on the U.S. foreign service facility in Benghazi, Libya, amid predictions from prominent voices that the scandal will bring down the Obama administration.

Former Arkansas governor and onetime presidential candidate Mike Huckabee made the bold prediction this week, ahead of a House hearing Wednesday that will feature witnesses of the attack.

“I believe that before it’s all over, this president will not fill out his full term,” he said. “I know that puts me on a limb. But this is not minor. It wasn’t minor when Richard Nixon lied to the American people and worked with those in his administration to cover up what really happened in Watergate.

“But, I remind you – as bad as Watergate was, because it broke the trust between the president and the people, no one died. This is more serious because four Americans did in fact die.”

Meanwhile, John Bolton, former U.N. ambassador and now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has also declared the Benghazi scandal could lead to Obama’s removal from office.

“This could be the hinge point,” he told Newsmax. “It’s that serious for them.”

Frank Gaffney, the president of the Center for Security Policy, wrote in a Washington Times column that “the dam seems to be breaking on the nearly eight-month-long cover-up concerning the deadly jihadist attack on Americans and their facilities in Benghazi, Libya.”

After the foreign service facility in Benghazi was attacked, the Obama administration initially claimed Muslims spontaneously rioted over a little-known online video that defamed Islam’s founder.

But now there is evidence that the administration knew from the beginning that it was a terrorist attack and altered its talking points.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is digging into the truth, holding a hearing that calls on those who were in Benghazi to explain what happened.

The questions will probe who created the story that was delivered to America and why.

Hear Huckabee:

Huckabee

Critics have asserted that in the heat of the presidential election race, Obama, who had been campaigning on the claim that al-Qaida essentially were defeated, was unwilling to provide ammunition to his GOP critics by confirming such a brazen terror attack on America, particularly on the anniversary of 9/11.

The witnesses include State Department career worker Gregory Hicks, who already has provided sworn testimony that American resources were told to “stand down” that day while four Americans died.

That statement would directly conflict with multiple statements by the Obama administration.

Rep. Darrell Issa, D-Calif., pointed out that the Obama administration specifically denied that anyone was told to stand down.

The Washington Post also reported that U.S. Embassy officials in Tripoli, some 600 miles away, tried unsuccessfully to get the Pentagon to scramble fighter jets in a show of force. The embassy also was unable to get permission to deploy four U.S. Special Operations troops in Benghazi during the attack.

Congressional investigators released a partial transcript of Hicks’ coming testimony. It includes his report that the lieutenant colonel in Tripoli who commanded the Special Operations team told him he was sorry that his men had been held back.

 

Hicks said he received communication from Stevens, saying, “Greg, we’re under attack.”

In an interview with the Fox News Channel, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, said getting the information is going to be a chore.

“There are people who want to testify that have been suppressed,” he said, according to the Washington Times.  “They’re scared to death of what the State Department is doing with them.”

Hillary Clinton, who was secretary of state at the time of the attack, has a huge stake in the outcome of the investigation, as she is considered the favorite for the 2016 Democratic Party nomination for president.

She famously unleashed an emotional outburst at an earlier hearing on Benghazi, dismissing questions about the reason for the attack with, “What difference does it make?”

Chaffetz expressed little confidence in what Obama and Clinton have told the public.

“We were certainly misled at every step of the way,” Chaffetz said.

In his Washington Times column, Gaffney noted the combination of congressional hearings along with reports that “long-silenced witnesses are determined to reveal what they know.

“At the instigation of Rep. Frank R. Wolf, Virginia Republican, and with encouragement from more than 700 special operations veterans and family members of those lost in Benghazi, some 135 legislators in the House of Representatives and three U.S. senators are calling for a special investigatory committee,” he wrote. “To be sure, Team Obama seems as determined as ever to defy efforts to ferret out the truth about Benghazi. In this, they have been aided by the failure of Congress to date to mount a single, concerted investigation of what led up to, happened during and took place after the attack.”

Gaffney wrote that it’s critical to know the truth about where Obama was during the attack and what was he doing.

“He evidently did not order a rescue operation,” he said. ” … We need to know why not, and what the president was doing instead of his first responsibility: protecting Americans.”

Gaffney said there are also questions about Hillary Clinton’s role, particularly why she failed “to intervene on behalf of her subordinates in harm’s way.”

Huckabee acknowledged that if Democrats continue to control the U.S. Senate, nothing will happen.

“They won’t let it happen, not because they’re protecting just the president, they’re trying to protect their entire political party. If they try to protect the president and their party, and do so at the expense of the truth, their president and their party will go down. Now, here’s what I’m going to suggest will happen – as the information and facts begin to come out, it will become so obvious that there was a concerted and very, very deliberate attempt to mislead this country and its people to lie to Congress, as well as to you.”

Huckabee continued: “When a president lies to the American people and is part of a cover-up, he cannot continue to govern. And as the facts come out, I think we’re going to see something startling. And before it’s over, I don’t think this president will finish his term unless somehow they can delay it in Congress past the next three and a half years.”

Retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, once commander of missions for the Army Rangers and now executive vice president for the Family Research Council, said the truth needs to come out about Benghazi.

In an interview published by WND, he said there has been no acceptable explanation for not rescuing Americans under siege in Benghazi, and nothing less than a special House committee investigation will satisfy him.

He said the lack of answers since has been bothering him for months, and that’s why he worked on a letter to Congress.

“I’ve been working this since not long after the events on the 11th of September. That said, the U.S. Congress has been sort of ignoring all of our efforts to try and get some full accounting on this thing,” Boykin said. “I just simply reached out to some people that I knew had a deep passion for this, that would in fact bring a different dimension to it and that’s the retired special operations guys that spent a good portion of their professional careers preparing for and executing these kinds of operations. They’ve risked their lives for this. They’ve seen people that have sacrificed their lives to save other Americans, and I knew these people would come on quickly and would come on with deep passion.”

The letter to the House of Representatives called for the creation of an investigative committee. It was signed by hundreds of members of the military.

Boykin said what’s baffling is why there was no attempt to rescue the Americans.

“Why was there no attempt to recover the bodies before they fell into the hands of the Libyans? We find that perplexing and inexcusable that we don’t have those answers,” he said.

Issa’s committee praised Mark Thompson, acting deputy assistant secretary for counter-terrorism; Hicks; and Eric Nordstrom, diplomatic security officer; for agreeing to testify.

The committee’s analysis indicates Clinton cut her own department’s counter-terrorism unit out of the situation, and a source reported the U.S. military could have reached Benghazi in time to save lives.

It’s not the first time talk of of impeaching Obama has come up.

Lawmakers who have broached the subject of impeachment include Reps. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.; Walter Jones, R-N.C.; Trey Radel, R-Fla.; and Steve Stockman. Others include former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas; former Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio; former assistant U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy; left-leaning investigative reporter Dave Lindorff; talk-radio host Mark Levin; former House Speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich; and author and columnist Pat Buchanan.

Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution states, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

The U.S. House of Representatives has the power to commence impeachment proceedings. If the House adopts an impeachment resolution, the U.S. Senate conducts a trial and determines whether to convict or acquit. If an official is convicted, he or she is removed from the position and may be barred from holding office again. The official may also face criminal prosecution.

Only two U.S. presidents have been impeached by the House: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. However, both presidents were acquitted in the Senate. Nixon resigned before the full House voted on his impeachment.

Besides the Benghazi disaster, issues that have prompted the impeachment discussions include Obama’s Fast and Furious gun-running scandal, his decision to order the assassination of an American-born Muslim cleric who joined al-Qaida, his “recess appointments” to the National Labor Relations Board even though Congress was not in recess, his appointment of many unvetted “czars,” his fight against enforcing immigration laws, amnesty, U.S. involvement in Libya and gun control.

Specifically on Benghazi, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney accused an anti-Muslim video on YouTube of inciting the attack. On Sept. 16, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice made five Sunday morning television appearances in which she claimed the attacks were spontaneous reactions to the obscure film. Obama mentioned the YouTube video six more times at the U.N. on Sept. 25.

However, there was never any kind of protest at the Benghazi compound that night.

WND also reported a March poll showed advocates for impeachment nearly equal to those against it. For example, regarding Obama’s campaign for amnesty to illegals, 44 percent said he should be impeached for it, while only 48 percent say he should not. And 46 percent said Obama should be impeached for launching the war to remove Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, while 49 percent said no.

“Taken by itself, any of these questions about President Obama could be ignored, but it becomes much more questionable when all of these … administration actions are taken as a whole,” said Fritz Wenzel, whose public opinion and media consulting company Wenzel Strategies conducted the poll.

“Obama appears to have found a way to split the nation directly down the middle on each issue, but, as his plummeting poll numbers may now indicate, the American public may well be catching up with the cumulative effect of this administration’s handling of the Constitution and the federal government,” Wenzel said.

Sign the petition urging Congress to impeach Obama.

Another recent call for impeachment came from rock legend and gun-rights defender Ted Nugent.

“There’s no question that this guy’s violations qualify for impeachment,” he said. “There’s no question.”

He blasted “the criminality of this government, the unprecedented abuse of power, corruption, fraud and deceit by the Chicago gangster-scammer-ACORN-in-chief.”

“It’s so diabolical,” he said.

Ted Nugent

Radio giant Rush Limbaugh said on his program that the Obama administration’s release of hundreds and potentially thousands of illegal-alien criminals from U.S. detention centers in connection with possible budget cuts is “an impeachable offense.”

“In what used to be considered (if we can remember this far back) normal, sane times, this is an impeachable offense,” Limbaugh said. “This is action being taken against the country. … It is sheer madness to be doing this. It is petulant, it is childish.”

Even Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin has called for the impeachment of Obama over his policy of permitting drone strikes on American citizens overseas who are members of terrorist organizations.

On WABC Radio’s “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” Benjamin said she believes the drone warfare is an impeachable offense.

See Dennis Kucinich advocate for impeachment over Libya:

Dennis Kucinich

See Texas congressman lobby for impeachment over gun control:

Texas Congressman lobby for Impeachment

See Andrew Napolitano talk about impeachment over the budget:

Andrew Napolitano

The idea of impeachment actually seems moderate given the results of another recent poll.

The poll, conducted by telephone by Fairleigh Dickinson University’s PublicMind, found that 29 percent of Americans believe armed revolution may be necessary, with 5 percent saying they’re not sure.

While 18 percent of Democrats and 27 percent of independents believe that to be true, 44 percent of Republicans questioned in the poll said armed revolution may be needed.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/obamas-departure-predicted-as-congress-focuses-on-cover-up/#eygjgO3sBjPhrI1g.99

 

Jane Fonda tells veterans boycotting her movie ‘The Butler’ to ‘get a life’

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information

and my rules:

 

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

 

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

Thank you for visiting!

 

This is a reblogged  from http://www.foxnews.com.

 

Posted by Hollie McKay

LOS ANGELES –  When Jane Fonda was cast as former First Lady Nancy Reagan in Lee Daniels’ forthcoming film “The Butler,” some Reagan fans were not pleased. Now, with the biographical due to hit theaters in October, a movement to boycott the movie is gaining some momentum.

Larry Reyes, a Navy veteran and founder of the “Boycott Hanoi Jane Playing Nancy Reagan” Facebook page has been particularly vocal about the casting decision, given Fonda’s past frolicking with the enemy during the Vietnam War.

“Growing up in a military family I heard my father and uncles talk about what Jane did, so from an early age I knew about her history with the war and how upset veterans were about it. Yet it amazed me that people just turned their backs and kept supporting her exercise videos and movies. I made a commitment early on not to support her projects,” Reyes told FOX411’s Pop Tarts column. “Then when I heard she was going to play such a well-liked and highly respected president’s wife, it got to me. They (the filmmakers) knew by picking Jane for the part they were going to stir up some stuff. I’m not a conservative or a liberal, I’m an American. And that was a slap in the face.”

This week, Fonda had a simple message for Reyes and the page’s fans.

“Get a life.”

In a statement to The Hollywood Reporter, Fonda said of her casting: “If it creates hoopla, it will cause more people to see the movie… I figured it would tweak the right. Who cares?”

Reyes does.

He told us Fonda had “every right” to protest the Vietnam War and to lobby Capitol Hill to get her message across, but says she bordered on treason when she went to Hanoi, Vietnam, called Americans “war criminals,” and was photographed seated on an anti-aircraft battery, a move she claimed she regretted in her 2005 autobiography.

“God only knows how many in our military were affected,” Reyes said. “Jane seems to love everything communist, but when it comes to making money she’s a gold capitalist. It’s my right to protest this film, and if I can stop a few people from seeing it, I will be happy.”

Yet according to Fonda, the former first lady is “happy” she was awarded the role and that in an effort to ensure she portrayed her accurately, Fonda even sent Mrs. Reagan some questions which she answered.

“They had me doing something that wasn’t very nice [in the movie]. And I said, ‘if she really did this, I’ll do it. But if it’s made up, I don’t want to do it.’ I don’t want to take cheap shots at her,” the actress told the Hollywood Reporter. She also said the First Lady’s gracious response to her being cast came as a surprise. “Because back when she was feisty she wasn’t nice to me. We all mellow. We all mellow.

Fonda also wrote on her personal blog last year that she wished it was “more than a cameo” and was “honored” to be playing such an esteemed political personality. Yet when FOX411 Pop Tarts column attempted to question her about  the film at an event she hosted in Los Angeles earlier this year, her handler made it clear that the movie was off limits.

But Fonda isn’t the only casting choice in “The Butler” causing some to roll their eyes.

Inspired by Wil Haygood’s Washington Post article about an African-American man (played by Forest Whitaker) who served as a butler to eight presidents in the White House for over 30 years, “The Butler” traces the dramatic changes that impacted American society, from the civil rights movement to Vietnam and beyond. Distributed by The Weinstein Co., the studio headed by prominent Democratic supporter Harvey Weinstein, “The Butler” has also enlisted a number of known liberal supporters to play key Republican roles including John Cusack as Richard Nixon, and Robin Williams as Dwight Eisenhower.

“It’s leftist Hollywood giving their finger to the rest of America,” Reyes said. “And that upsets me. But Hollywood is doing that on purpose.”

And despite Reyes’ efforts, experts told us that the debate over the film is likely to translate into ticket sales.

“The controversy will trigger more publicity and generally in Hollywood, any publicity is better than no publicity,” crisis communications expert Glenn Selig anticipated. “My guess is Harvey Weinstein is thrilled that there is so much attention being paid to the movie.”

Casting specialist Holly Wolfe concurred that the Fonda selection should work in the studio’s favor.

“Nancy Reagan was an important figure in our history. In casting you first have to decide on who physically resembles this actual person. Next you have to think who has the chops to pull this off. It would be a true disgrace to cast someone that couldn’t possibly hold up to this high standard,” she added. “If Jane didn’t feel like she could give an honest portrayal of Nancy Reagan then she would have turned it down. I hope first and foremost that the concerns would be about the work and not about political slaps in the face, but I am sure they are getting a kick out of this uproar.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/04/11/jane-fonda-tells-veterans-boycotting-her-movie-butler-to-get-life/?intcmp=features#ixzz2QMu4PJXX

 

Yet Another Democrat Tries To Assassinate An American President

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

 

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all

comments.

 

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 

This is a reblogged from politicaloutcast.com. 

 

Posted by Chris Graham

I laughed out loud when I learned that the man who sent poisoned letters to President Obama is a Democrat. And then I thought,“Well doesn’t that figure?” 

The would-be assassin, whose fame I will not contribute to by writing his name, sent letters laced with ricin to Obama and to Republican Senator Roger Wicker. Inhaling the toxin is deadly, and all it takes to kill a human is an amount 1/288 the size of an aspirin.

A picture of the man, a white guy whom I will henceforth refer to as John, surfaced on the Internet (where pictures are wont to surface). It comes from his Facebook page and shows John kneeling down beside the back bumper of a car, which has a sticker on it that reads “Christian and a Democrat.”,John is giving the sticker a thumbs-up. 

However, his Facebook page lists his political views as “Independent.” So the fact that he gave a pro-Democrat bumper sticker a thumbs-up and also tried killing a Democratic president likely means he is one of those people who feel that Obama is too moderate, that the Democratic Party is not suitably liberal, and therefore has registered as an Independent.

Even I initially thought that whoever did it was either a Republican or some backwoods, tinfoil-hat-wearing pseudo-Libertarian. Now that it’s come out he is a Democrat/Independent, it’s no surprise; virtually every assassin or would-be assassin of American presidents, both Republican and Democrat, have been leftists (to the extent that their political views are known).

Successful assassins (whose politics we know):

• John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat, shot and killed President Lincoln
• Charles Guiteau, a member of the communist Oneida Community, shot and killed President Garfield
• Leon Czolgosz, a leftist anarchist (similar to the useful idiots in the Occupy movement) shot and killed President McKinley  
• Lee Harvey Oswald, a communist, shot and killed President Kennedy.

Failed assassins (whose politics we know):

• Severino Di Giovanni, a leftist anarchist, tried to bomb President-elect Hoover’s train
• Giuseppe Zangara, a professed anti-capitalist, tried shooting President-elect Franklin Roosevelt
• Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola, two Marxists, tried killing President Truman at the Blair House
• Samuel Byck, who tried joining the leftist Black Panther group, attempted to kill President Nixon
• Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, member of the Manson Family and also a hippie environmentalist, shot at President Ford
• Sara Jane Moore tried to kill President Ford as well because, as she said, “the government had declared war on the Left.”
• Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez, a leftist connected to the Occupy movement, tried getting a one-in-a-billion shot at President Obama by firing a gun at the White House

The only individual whose political motivations can be deduced as coming from the right side of the political spectrum is Francisco Martin Duran, who claims he was “incited” by conservative talk-show host Chuck Baker, but also claimed that he was trying to save the world from an alien mist which was connected by an umbilical cord to another alien in the Colorado mountains. So there’s that.

All conservatives, let alone decent human beings, should be upset at any assassination attempt against any president, even Obama. Fortunately I haven’t seen any conservatives bummed out that John, with the ricin letters, failed to kill Obama. As awful–my word, just awful–a president as Obama is, and as evil as some of us, including I, think he is, he still has a wife and two children and they don’t deserve their husband and father, respectively, being taken away like that. Plus, though it’s an unfortunate fact, the fact is that Obama is the representative of America to the world. An attempt to kill him is symbolic of an attack on America.

So hopefully John with the ricin letters will be apprehended and receive capital punishment.

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/04/yet-another-democrat-tries-to-assassinate-an-american-president/#ixzz2R5HPtIPL